HND Social Science

There is extensive evidence of discrimination against ethnic minorities throughout the labour market. For example, a recent report on the fire service, carried out by the fire service inspectorate [Equality and Fairness in the Fire Service, 1999], exposed various forms of discrimination including routine name calling. In addition, non-white fire fighters felt that they were less likely than their white colleagues to be promoted because of their skin colour. The inspectors wrote that "ethnic minorities and women should feel welcome . . . Instead they feel excluded".

This directive arises out of article 13 of the Amsterdam Treaty of June 1997, which called for "appropriate action to combat discrimination based on sex, racial or ethnic origin, religion or belief, disability, age or sexual orientation."

With the same exceptions (African Asians and Chinese, who were more likely than Whites to earn over £500 per week in the mid-nineties), non-Whites are paid less than whites in the UK:

Males Females

Blacks £7.01 £6.71

Indians £8.01 £5.75

Other minorities £7.70 £6.66

Whites £8.34 £6.59

[Source: Church J and Summerfield C, 1996, Social Focus on Ethnic Minorities, HMSO]

People in ethnic minorities are less likely than Whites to be employed as professionals, administrators and managers. However, this generalisation conceals significant variation between minority groups: over a quarter (27%) of employed Chinese men are in non-routine, non-manual jobs, as are more than a fifth (22%) of male Indian employees; in contrast, among Black Caribbean male employees the proportion is just 10%, among Black-Africans it is 13% and among Bangladeshis it is 16%.

Ethnic minority people continue to have difficulty smashing through the 'glass ceiling' to top jobs. But a small number of non-Whites have achieved elite positions. For example, in 1997 there was one South Asian Chief Police Officer and two non-Whites among the top four grades in the Civil Service.

Labour Force Survey, 2000, ONS

Modood T et al, 1997, Diversity and Disadvantage: Ethnic Minorities in Britain, PSI

Hansard, 30 July 1997]

A 2001 study by a research team at the University of North London’s Institute of Policy Studies, found that school governing bodies and recruitment panels were biased against ethnic-minority teachers seeking promotion. They tended to misinterpret racial differences in demeanour – such as body language, levels of confidence and attitude – leading them to draw the wrong conclusions about non-white candidates’ suitability for positions of responsibility. The team, led by Professor Alistair Ross, examined the careers of 10,000 teachers, included 879 who were non-white, in 932 schools in 22 English LEAs.

21 per cent of the white teachers in the study with at least 15 years' experience were heads or deputies, compared with only 13% of their Black and Asian colleagues, and only four in 10 white teachers were on the main scale, compared with half of the ethnic-minority teachers.

(

Ethnic minorities and the labour market: interim analytical report Cabinet Office Performance and Innovation Unit, 20^th February 2002

Research leader: Shamit Saggar, Queen Mary and Westfield College, London.

• Ethnic minorities comprise 6.7% of Britain’s working-age population and will account for half its growth over the next 10 years.

• 6% of the workforce in the public sector is drawn from ethnic minority groups, as is 10% of the paid workforce in the voluntary sector.

• 7% of small businesses are in ethnic minority ownership.

• Among ethnic minorities, the odds of being unemployed "vary significantly with religion," even after allowance is made for education and residential area. Indian Hindus are the least likely to be unemployed and experience less unemployment than Indians of other religions. Pakistani and Bangladeshi Muslims are the most likely to be unemployed (four times more so than Indian Hindus), but Indian Muslims are more likely to be employed than Indian Sikhs. "Far more is in play than just religious effects," says the report.

• After adjustments are made for education, training and family responsibilities, Indian men in paid work earn on average £23 less per week than white men, Caribbean men £81 less, Pakistani/Bangladeshi men £129 less, and African men £132 less.

• After adjustments are made for education, training and family responsibilities, Indian women in paid work earn on average £14 more per week than white women and Caribbean women earn £30 more. But Pakistani/Bangladeshi women earn £34 less.

• Among men born between 1960 and 1979, 33% of whites in employment held professional/managerial jobs in the 1990s, as did 28.6% of Black Caribbeans, 42.5% of Indians and 22.8% of Pakistanis.

• Among women born between 1960 and 1979, 35.4% of whites in employment held professional/managerial jobs in the 1990s, as did 38.1% of Black Caribbeans, 38.3% of Indians and 32.3% of Pakistanis.

• One in 20 Indian men is a doctor, compared with one in 200 white men.

• A third of black women work in the health and social services, compared with a fifth of white women.

• 25% of Pakistani men are self-employed compared with 11% of white men.

• A third of Bangladeshi men work as cooks or waiters.

• Among working-age women, fewer Bangladeshis (20%) than women in any other ethnic group want to have paid jobs. At the other end of the spectrum, four-fifths of Caribbean women want paid work.